As the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) systematically degrade Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure, Israel faces a complex challenge: to what extent can it maintain its international legitimacy and pursue existential security objectives, without the guaranteed backing of the United States?
The initial results of the strikes reveal a paradox: Israel’s strategic position is strengthening – even as fundamental questions emerge about the sustainability of its independent military approach.
The US–Israel partnership: support without commitment
The US response to the strikes exemplifies the complexities of alliance management when partners have different appetites for risk.
The administration of President Donald Trump has continued to provide military support to Israel, including intelligence sharing, and defensive coordination – while explicitly avoiding direct involvement in the strikes against Iran.
That reflects a reported divide among top Pentagon officials over the extent of US military support. Many, including chief of US Central Command, Gen. Michael Kurilla, have requested more resources to support Israel. But their requests have drawn resistance from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby, who has long opposed diverting US military assets from Asia to the Middle East.
This creates a strategic dilemma for Israel: can it achieve its ultimate objectives – including the neutralization or significant slowing down of Iran’s nuclear program – without total US commitment, including the use of American bunker-busting capabilities?
No comments:
Post a Comment